A LOG‐MULTIPLICATIVE ASSOCIATION MODEL FOR ALLOCATING HOMICIDES WITH UNKNOWN VICTIM‐OFFENDER RELATIONSHIPS*

This research note critically evaluates conventional methods for allocating homicides with an unknown victim/offender relationship to meaningful categories, and it proposes an alternative approach. We argue that conventional methods are based on a problematic assumption, namely, that the missing data mechanism is “ignorable.” As an alternative to these methods, we propose an imputation algorithm derived from a log‐multiplicative model that does not require this assumption. We apply this technique to estimate levels of homicides disaggregated by victim/offender relationship using the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR) data for 1996 and 1997, and we compare the resulting estimates with those obtained from the application of conventional procedures. Our results yield a larger proportion of stranger homicides than are obtained from the conventional methods.     

Failed States After 9/11: What Did We Know and What Have We Learned?

This paper addresses the relationship between accumulated knowledge and U.S. policy dealing with failed states and terrorism. The central thesis is threefold: (1) that more was known about the possible linkages between failing states and terrorism than appears in pre-9/11 U.S. policies; (2) that since 9/11 some important realignment of knowledge and practice has occurred, but it remains partial and incomplete; and (3) that new knowledge, especially about the policies to sustain and promote legitimate governance, needs to be generated in order to support an effective grand strategy for addressing the threats and challenges of the twenty-first century. The paper recommends such a grand strategy and, in addition to the required new knowledge, a significant reorganization of the U.S. national security policy-making apparatus. International studies curricula appear well suited for contributing to that new knowledge and the practitioners we require.     

Bingo! Cheating and legally suspect practices in one of North Carolina’s only forms of legalized gambling

Bingo is one of two legalized forms of gambling in the state of North Carolina. This paper is largely a product of information gleaned from an undercover police operation conducted by a special state task force constructed by the State Attorney General in 1983. The investigation concerned violation of state law designed to regulate bingo activity. This report provides the reader with the development of state law associated with bingo operations, and concentrates on the illegitimate methods used by professional operators to cheat bingo patrons. Legislation designed to crack-down on bingo abuse is discussed as well Gambling is one of the most controversial social activities yet one of the least studied forms of social behavior (King, 1985). Bingo is a specific form of legalized gambling which has received very little attention by social scientists. There have been, however, a few studies which address the characteristics and motivations of bingo players. For example, it has been suggested that bingo is primarily a female activity (Dixie, 1987). However, it has been found that motivations among male and female players differ. Females are motivated more by social contact with other players, whereas men are motivated more by a need for economic advancement (King, 1985). Although some studies exist on the characteristics of bingo players, there is a dearth of research on the operators of bingo games, particularly those operators who ply their trade in a legally suspect fashion. This paper focuses upon the legally suspect mechanisms utilized by some professionals who run bingo gambling operations. The controversy over gambling often extends to state legislatures where lawmakers must wrestle with the question of whether or not to allow legalized gambling within their borders. On the one hand, advocates of legalized gambling cite potential advantages such as the creation of employment opportunities, its potential for enhancement of state revenues, the recreational value of such activity for consumers and the general enhancement of tourism within states having legalized gambling. On the other hand, critics of legalized gambling proclaim its evils such as the perceived relationship of gambling to organized crime, the belief that gambling breeds other social ills (e.g. theft or other crimes of economic desperation) and the belief that gambling can become a psychologically addictive disease which can contribute to individual and family impoverishment as well as community disorganization. North Carolina is one state in which the legislature has demonstrated strong resistance to the allowance of legalized gambling operations. Two exceptions exist, however. North Carolina allows two forms of legalized gambling, bingo games and raffles. This paper focuses upon bingo gambling operations. The central thesis of this paper is bingo was originally legalized to provide tax-exempt, charitable organizations a means of revenue enhancement which would help fund their socially worthwhile endeavors. The legislative changes allowing this form of gambling, however, have created opportunities for professional game operators whose major motivation is personal economic enrichment (versus economic enhancement of charitable organizations). The personal economic enrichment motive is offered to account for the various forms of cheating which were observed in a special investigation of a sample of bingo operations. In a review of theoretical explanations of gambling behavior Kim King (1985) suggests an extension of the functional approach which he labels an “Economic/Status” explanation. This explanation stresses the positive functions of gambling for society and the individual. According to the economic/status explanation, the positive functions of gambling (for the individual) include an innovative opportunity for economic enrichment, success, and status (King, 1985). We would like to suggest that such reasons explain why a number of legally suspect bingo operations have emerged in North Carolina. The same reasons appear to explain the use of various schemes by some bingo operators to cheat their patrons. In short, bingo profits appear to be the primary reason for the massive increase in the number of bingo operations. Other theoretical factors are suggested to account for the attraction of patrons to bingo games. According to King (1985), the “functionalist” explanation of the recent popularity of bingo gambling is due to the tension-release afforded to players of bingo; bingo offers an exciting and innovative way to attain economic success. A concurrent Marxian explanation sees bingo gambling as an opiate of the oppressed, providing a false sense of control and success (King, 1985). Other theoretical factors suggested by King include the symbolic interactionist idea that gambling is a way to display one’s self to others in order to gain character (Goffman, 1967) and the idea that gambling for some people is a means of conspicuous consumption (Veblen, 1899). These factors may account for the popularity of bingo operations, however the focus of this paper is not upon an explanation of why bingo has become so popular. This paper will outline some of the legally suspect methods used by unscrupulous bingo game operators. The information for this report is based upon an undercover police investigation of illegal bingo activity in North Carolina. The investigation was to explore the nature of illegal bingo gambling within the state. Bingo gambling has a unique history in North Carolina; its recent legal history will be discussed in this treatise as well as the various legitimate and illegitimate methods of bingo game operators, state law designed to regulate bingo gambling and measures taken by “professional” (versus “charitable”) operators to protect their lucrative but legally suspect trade.     

PUBLIC SECTOR REFORM IN DUTCH HIGHER EDUCATION: THE ORGANIZATIONAL TRANSFORMATION OF THE UNIVERSITY

During the past few decades traditional state‐centred governing arrangements have been critiqued and replaced by alternative modes of governance. Higher education is one of the public sectors where such shifts in governance have been seen. As a consequence of the reshuffling of authority and responsibilities across the different levels in Dutch higher education, universities as organizations have become important foci of attention in the system’s coordination. The main question addressed in this article is to what extent we can speak of an organizational transformation of Dutch universities. Based on conceptual ideas from researchers such as Greenwood and Hinings (1996), Ferlie et al. (1996) , and Brunsson and Sahlin‐Andersson (2000) , we use a framework that focuses attention on the concepts of the construction of identity, hierarchy and rationality to systematically analyse the various aspects of transformations of professional organizations.     

Bolt from the Blue or Avoidable Failure? Revisiting September 11 and the Origins of Strategic Surprise

Drawing on the strategic surprise, warning-response, and foreign policy literature, this article argues that the September 11 terror attacks should be regarded as a strategic surprise and examines a number of key factors that contributed to vulnerability and inhibited vigilance. Three broad explanatory "cuts" derived from the literature—psychological, bureau-organizational, and agenda-political—are deployed to sift through the rapidly expanding empirical record in an effort to shed light on the processes and contextual factors that left the United States vulnerable to the attacks. The article aims to improve our understanding of generic processes and practices that enhance or detract from vulnerability and vigilance.     

Environmental dispute resolution and hazardous waste cleanups: A cautionary tale of policy implementation

New York State experimented with replacing their litigation-oriented system for achieving toxic dump site cleanup with one promising to lower transaction costs through alternative dispute resolution. Our analysis of outcomes is informed by three generations of implementation work focusing on (1) the motivations and incentives shaping individual behavior, (2) the larger organizational and political factors associated with variation across cases, and (3) the generic properties of policy implements. This mosaic approach to explanation produces, we believe, a more lifelike picture of use to policy makers for understanding the dynamic and interrelated nature of their choices.